The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1887-08-10
The PHYSICIANS AND DRUGGISTS.

many Of the physicians and druggists as
we could reach. To each of the drug.
gists we asked the following questions:
1. What is your position in the pend.
ing prohibition.election?
2. AS druggist do you object to the
Bill9
Answers of f. T. white. the managing
partner OF the firm Of Wilhite & Wilhite.
I am in favor of prohibition. I be.
lieve it will be best for our city aud
County, 49,, 95
As a druggist, am not opposed to the
Bill. / expect to obey the law, and
hence have no fears of the penalty.
Answers Of j., B. simpson. the head of the
firm OF simpson, Reid 8 Co.
/ ann for prohibition. @
do not object to the Bill from a drug
gist standpoint. s.fg a 10
Answers OF Cant T. II. Hill, the managing
partner; Of the firm OF Hill Bros.
!; 1 have tried to avoid any public noto-
riety. in this contest. ! do not, however,
like to- appear unwilling to state my
position when directly called on for it.
+ am in favor Of prohibition. . aai:les
81 Asa druggist I am. not. opposed to the
Bill. aui .sI; s45os rtni.s szl..;i e.tl
i, sThusit will be seen that three out of
four ofsthel druggists of the City favor
prohibition, and do not object to the
provisions of the pending Bill to drug.
.gists. q: ,:;sit f9 a3g rl5sls ~ -
ITO the following physicians of the
County we propounded the following
questions dsa5 81! y.
s i. How long have you been practiciDg
smedicine7 >i17 -
y 2. WHAT'S your position in the pend
ing election on prohibition?
+ 8. Why do you occupy this positions
Answer Of Dr.. T. a, wilhite, Of Anderson.
1. Have been practiciug medicine for.
,ty-one years. "A, e44f j.
2. Have always been opposed to the
indiscerimninate sale of whiskey, believing
it should be placed in the list of poisons.
8. / occupy this position because it is
dealing with a great moral question.
Answers of DR.. j. p. Duckett, of the City
ofAnderson.
|, Having been asked to answer the three
questions that have, been handed me
concerning the approaching election on
the, subject Of prohibition, I will state
my answers ss follows. 5isa:a s
!, Ihave been practicipg medicine thir'
teen years, or since March, 1874 t-ti
I am in favor of prohibition in the
pending election. 10 7ssImu
My reason for my position is, that in
my opinion, the licensed sale of intoxi.
eating liquors is a great eoih, and very
detrimental to the best interests of hu.
mainly .:sp p5iaq
As a physician. I .am free to admit
that we of.en need Notwithstanding
7in the practice of medicine but I find
nothipg in the pending Bill that pro.
.hibits physicians from prescribing and
druggists selling it under the present
existing laws. "A s,t 6s
Answers of DIR. M. A. Thompson, Of Hall
Township. .'as ssst.f
have been practicing medicine since
1880.
am in favor of prohibition.
think that licensing. the sale; of whis.
key entails great evil on our country.
The abolition of the whiskey traffic
would promote, in my judgment, the
welfare of the community. I do not
,understapd that the pending Bill inter.
feres with, the prescription or sale OF
spirituous. liquors for medicinal purposes.
Answers ofDrggJ. c. Harris, Of Bolton.
IT began practicing April lst, 1885,
2. My position in the coming election
is prohibition in every particular. s.
8. Because the betterment of the coun.
Try demands it, and I see nothing objec-
tionable Or contemplate in the Bill. =
Answers Of pr. v. 81 Nardin. Of Anderson a, ' son
ell. I have been: practicing medicine
since 1860. e ~ 81 L. 4iiSl zel7a
2. lam in favor of prohibition, but do
not like many features in the!present
Bill. ,,t.Gl i,tf.9sa s4s4.q5 bn& IL ;o;l:sq
8. Because 1 believe that the license
system works injury to to the community,
and that it is my dntysto oppose it. l
cannot vote sfor, license under any cir.
cumstancss. hal "a :. s.ai .;'s flis
Answers OF DR.. j. o. white, Of Anderson.
/. I have been practiciEg medicine
since 1879.
@. I expect, as heretofore, to vote
against whiskey, not against any man
who sellsit, or may expect to sell it.
8, Because see nothing in the Muir.
ray Bill that deprives me ofthe right, as
a physician, in case it is needed, to pre-.
scribe such stimulant for my patients.
Answer OF Dr..J. G.. Duokworth, Of Hope
well Township.
1. I have been practicipg medicine
twelve years. -. - '-'
2. Ny position in the pending election
on prohibition is unqualified. I am
heartily in favor of the Act of the Legis
lature, and endorse it IN toto. I see
nothing in the Act that appears veno.
NOUS, or that in any way interferes with
my practice of medicine, or that would
interfere with my prescribing liquor
when necessary.
8. Because, as it now stands, I regard
intoxicating liquors as curse to the
human race. The license system has
been tried and found auaating, and has
been the source of the wholesale abuse
IF uo;no 1;nuor mora than ANYTHING e1se.